Faishal, Achmad (2019) Turbulensi Hukum Dalam Pengaturan Pengukuhan Kawasan Hutan Di Indonesia. Doctor thesis, Universitas Brawijaya.
Abstract
Turbulensi hukum dalam pengaturan pengukuhan kawasan hutan adalah suatu keadaan antara keadaan kacau (disorder) dengan keadaan teratur (order) yang ditandai dengan adanya fluktuasi antara kehampaan hukum (void) dan ketegasan hukum (plenitude), antara determinasi hukum dan indeterminasi hukum, hukum menjadi sangat represif terhadap warga yang lemah dan sebagian orang kebal terhadap hukum. Turbulensi hukum dalam pengaturan pengukuhan kawasan hutan merupakan penyebab terjadinya ketidakpastian hukum kawasan hutan dengan implikasi yang ditimbulkannya berupa pelanggaran terhadap hak dasar yang telah diatur dalam konstitusi serta deforestasi semakin meningkat dan mengkhawatirkan dari tahun ke tahun. Terbentuknya ruang turbulensi hukum bermula dari inkonsistensi pasal di dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 41 Tahun 1999 tentang Kehutanan (UUK), yakni pasal 15 angka (1) yang mengatur materi pokok pengukuhan kawasan hutan secara kumulatif terdiri dari 4 (empat) tahapan meliputi a) penunjukan kawasan hutan, b) penataan batas kawasan hutan, c) pemetaan kawasan hutan, dan d) penetapan kawasan hutan. Namun pasal pendefinisian kawasan hutan yakni Pasal 1 angka (3) melakukan penyempitan hukum (rechtsverfijning) dengan menggunakan frasa “ditunjuk dan/atau ditetapkan”. Terjadinya turbulensi hukum disebabkan oleh pengaktifan norma yang menyimpang. Pasal 4 ayat (2) UUK mendelegasikan wewenang mengatur kepada Pemerintah dan Pemerintah melakukan subdelegasi kepada Menteri sedang hal itu tidak diisyaratkan oleh Undang-Undang induk atau tidak sesuai dengan asas “delegatus non potest delegare”. Dalam eskalasinya, Menteri hanya mengeluarkan keputusan penunjukan kawasan hutan (besluit) sudah menyatakan mengikat secara umum atas dalil penunjukan sama dengan penetapan (vide Pasal 1 angka (3) UUK). Mengatasi keadaan demikian sangat bergantung pada idealnya sistem pengujian peraturan perundang-undangan dalam menyelesaikan konflik norma pada tingkatan yang berbeda dan sistem hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan menentukan kekuatan mengikat suatu norma. Kelemahan sistem dapat menimbulkan keadaan chaos dalam hukum dengan nuansa pengalihan aktivisme hukum dari besluit menjadi beleid.
English Abstract
Legal turbulence in forest area regulation of determination in Indonesia emerged from the inconsistency of Article 1 point (3) and Article 15 point (1) in Law Number 41 of 1999 on Forestry (hereinafter referred to as Forestry Law). Article 1 point (3) which is a definition article, provides a definition of forest areas by using the phrase “designated and/or stipulated” while the subject matter regulated in Forestry Law Article 14 paragraph (2) states legal certainty over the forest areas after establishment. The establishment of forest areas by Article 15 paragraph (1) is carried out through designation, boundary arrangement, mapping and stipulation. It is apparent that designation is the initial process for the establishment of forest areas. However, with the argument to anticipate forest encroachment, the Government interprets the provisions of Article 1 point (3) narrowly, only by stipulating a policy regarding forest areas designation without considering the conditions in the field. It is considered legal and binding that it is a forest area. If the designation by the Government is only an administrative product in the form of a decision which is clearly a flawed procedure, the designation is entitled decision (besluit) containing regulations (beleid). Regulation on forest areas designation by the Government have led to the legal turbulence, that is, an intermediate or a boundary between disorder and order. Using normative legal research, correlational research, and law reform research, material truth about Article 1 point (3) and policy regarding forest areas designation as a source or cause of legal turbulence, implications of legal turbulence in forest areas regulation, and forms of settlement that are regulated in the legal system and appropriate regulation in the future are found out and analyzed. This study finds the followings: First, legal turbulence occurs in the regulation of forest areas originating from Article 1 point (3) and the cause is the policy on forest areas designation that are made without the inventory process as stipulated in Forestry Law Article 13. Legal turbulence positively occurs in the regulation of forest areas based on the fulfillment of legal turbulence indicators including: a) there has been a situation between order and disorder, b) there has been a fluctuation between void and plenitude, c) the existence of legal determination and indetermination and d) the law becomes a tool of firm authority against certain parties and some people are immune from the law. Forestry Law is no longer an autonomous institution but rather becomes a repressive law with the proliferation of violations of constitutional rights as regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Second, the state of legal turbulence in the regulation of forest areas leads to the consequences of testing legislation. Is conducting a material test Article 1 point (3) which is the source of the occurrence of legal turbulence in the Constitutional Court is the right choice to overcome legal turbulence in the regulation of forest areas or simply by applying a judicial review of the regulation on forest areas designation in the Supreme Court? The legal system in Indonesia cannot show which one is right, what has been regulated in the Indonesian legal system makes the situation even more uncertain. Testing Article 1 point (3) in the Constitutional Court even though the petition is granted with a decision stating that the phrase “designated and/or” and so forth no longer has binding legal force, in fact, it does not provide benefits to the applicant because the government's policy on forest area designation legal activism is transferred into an independent ix regulation. Applying a judicial review of the regulation on forest areas designation to the Supreme Court before the submission of judicial review of Article 1 point (3) to the Constitutional Court is impossible because Article 1 point (3) uses the phrase “designated and/or” and so forth, which is contradicts to the 1945 Constitution. In general, applying a judicial review after the decision of the Constitutional Court is no longer a basis for the Supreme Court to decide on the regulation of the policy on forest areas designation as long as the legislators do not make legal improvements. However, specifically in this case, the application of a judicial review of the policy on forest areas designation is still possible because the main material is Article 15 paragraph (1), which is the basis of the Supreme Court's assessment, but it becomes useless because the Government argues that the policy on forest areas designation is an independent regulation entitled decision (beleid). If it is sued in the State Administrative Court, it is also polemic with jurisdiction in terms of regulation (besluit). Third, the unresolved problem of legal turbulence in the regulation of forest areas is caused by: a) The normalization of the legislation hierarchical system is not included in the provisions of relative enforceability namely: the “das doppelte rechtsalintz” legal norm, if it is upward it is sourced and based on the norms above and if it is downward it becomes the basis and source for legal norms below it so that a legal norm has a validity period (rechtskracht) which is relative, so that if the legal norm above it (which becomes the basis for implementing regulations) is revoked or deleted, the legal norm below is revoked or deleted. b) Dualistic of testing institutions of legislation by placing the Supreme Court examining the rules under the law against the law and the Constitutional Court examining the law against the Constitution is a system that is not ideal to address the legal turbulence issue even the state of legal turbulence becomes chaotic in law. c) The normalization of the pseudo-hierarchical system of legislation referring to the Kelsen concept for its settlement is carried out by statutory testing institutions, in this case, there is a correlation between all the hierarchies of legislation with the placement of two statutory testing institutions that separate legislation products and government administrative products (policy regulations), such legal order is not ideal. Not only overcoming legal turbulence, a compulsion regarding the coordination between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court for testing statutory regulations if the Supreme Court materially examines a regulation under a law which stipulates the law to be the basis of an assessment or in applying a test to the Constitutional Court is also implied in it. Such a situation can lead to reciprocity if the Supreme Court tests it based on other provisions of the Law which have relevance so that the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court are mutually prominent in the downstream. Ideally, placing a pure Constitutional Court as the court of law and Supreme Court as the court of justice so that legal turbulence in other fields does not experience a similar state of legal turbulence in the regulation of forest areas. As long as the existing legal system has not been reformed, there is no option for the Constitutional Court to enter into progressive laws specifically on issues such as turbulence in the regulation of forest areas. Decisions can contain sentences that state this decision can be used as a reference for the Supreme Court to refuse the application of judicial review on the policy of which the existence is to implement the provisions of the Article stated by the Constitutional Court so that it no longer has binding legal force.
Other obstract
-
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctor) |
|---|---|
| Identification Number: | DIS/346.046 75/FAI/t/2019/061906700 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Turbulensi hukum, Pengaturan, Pengukuhan, dan Kawasan hutan. |
| Subjects: | 300 Social sciences > 346 Private law > 346.04 Property > 346.046 Government control and regulation of specific kinds of land and natural resources > 346.046 75 Government control and regulation of specific kinds of land and natural resources (Forest lands) |
| Divisions: | S2/S3 > Doktor Ilmu Hukum, Fakultas Hukum |
| Depositing User: | Endang Susworini |
| Date Deposited: | 08 Feb 2022 08:52 |
| Last Modified: | 08 Feb 2022 08:52 |
| URI: | http://repository.ub.ac.id/id/eprint/189569 |
Preview |
Text
Achmad Faishal.pdf Download (11MB) | Preview |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |